Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 5th Oct 2008 15:57 UTC
Windows There is one thing that really pushes my buttons, one thing that is sure to send me off on a rant on life, the universe, and everything. I have a 21" widescreen 1680x1050 display - which might not be large to some of the real geeks in here, but to me, it's pretty huge. With so much screen real estate, why oh why do my friends all still insist on maximising every window they come across when they sit down behind my computer? This - and more - is the subject of the latest post on Microsoft's Engineering 7 weblog.
E-mail Print r 3   · Read More · 61 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 332490
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by sbergman27
by sbergman27 on Sun 5th Oct 2008 20:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sbergman27"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

What is supposed to happen when you put a 'font-size: 81%" for body and then proceed to use a lot of 'font-size: 0.8em' for individual elements in the body? Are you supposed to end up with 0.8 * 12pt = 9.6pt or 0.81 * 0.8 * 12pt = 7.8pt?

And I thought this was obvious enough not to have to mention... but to the people who aren't getting 7 pt, what is your base font set to, and what is your minimum font size set to?

I'm not at all sure that this can be blamed on FreeType.

Reply Parent Score: 4

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

What is supposed to happen when you put a 'font-size: 81%" for body and then proceed to use a lot of 'font-size: 0.8em' for individual elements in the body? Are you supposed to end up with 0.8 * 12pt = 9.6pt or 0.81 * 0.8 * 12pt = 7.8pt?


CSS gets overridden the lower you get. So if you have a style on the body and a style on an element, then element level will override the body level. If you are interest in this sort of stuff, I highly suggest firebug on FF, best web dev tool out there for CSS/JS.

And I thought this was obvious enough not to have to mention... but to the people who aren't getting 7 pt, what is your base font set to, and what is your minimum font size set to?


Default config of FF3 on Vista is 16pt Times New Roman.

Like I said before though, if you are going for a fixed size, you should be using px, exactly for this reason. If you are going for a relative size, 81% is just silly, because you are deliberately saying "Make this smaller then what the user set as an ideal font size."


I'm not at all sure that this can be blamed on FreeType.


I'm not saying it is all freetypes fault. I have just noticed that reading MSDN stuff in particular on a default linux install is pretty much illegible, which is why I mentioned it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

You are not completely right here.

Absolute values like px or pt overwrite inherited values, yes. But em is a relative value. It is dependent on the inherited font size (1em == the width of letter 'm'). Therefor, indeed another shrink happens, as sbergman assumed.

I also want to add that px is not, as you claim, the right unit for font sizes, even if you want to give a fixed font size. You should instead use pt, which at least (while not following the user's preference for base font size) respects the screen's DPI.

Reply Parent Score: 3